Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[IT 000]

If a dwarf in a 1vs1 suffers a hand injury, it's over for him. He's done. Even if it's Trifle Pewter VS Adamantine, if he can't hold his sword/shield, he will die quickly.

This is why you test it multiple times to reduce the odds of this happening. And since they're armored Trifle Pewter will never penetrate adamantine except if it's a blunt weapon.

If you fully armour the dwarves, I find that the losing metal never penetrates the winning metal, and you end up with a large margin and you don't get an accurate representation of the capabilities of the weapon material vs organic tissue.
It's simple statistics: a higher sample = better accuracy. More tests, and tests with larger groups, help to sort out the "flukes" from the "freaking good".
Still, I doubt any of these results would be different if it was 25 1vs1 matches rather than 1 25vs25 match. The better weapon material will shine through.

As previously stated I agree, because they were armored the tests are still accurate. Against unarmored targets it may be wiser to do 1v1 to prevent dwarves from ganging up as one lucky strike quickly leaves a 5v5 match into a 5v4 match and that can seriously impact the test.

[franti]

If a dwarf in a 1vs1 suffers a hand injury, it's over for him. He's done. Even if it's Trifle Pewter VS Adamantine, if he can't hold his sword/shield, he will die quickly.

This is why you test it multiple times to reduce the odds of this happening. And since they're armored Trifle Pewter will never penetrate adamantine except if it's a blunt weapon.

If you fully armour the dwarves, I find that the losing metal never penetrates the winning metal, and you end up with a large margin and you don't get an accurate representation of the capabilities of the weapon material vs organic tissue.
It's simple statistics: a higher sample = better accuracy. More tests, and tests with larger groups, help to sort out the "flukes" from the "freaking good".
Still, I doubt any of these results would be different if it was 25 1vs1 matches rather than 1 25vs25 match. The better weapon material will shine through.

As previously stated I agree, because they were armored the tests are still accurate. Against unarmored targets it may be wiser to do 1v1 to prevent dwarves from ganging up as one lucky strike quickly leaves a 5v5 match into a 5v4 match and that can seriously impact the test.

In an unarmoured test, it comes down to which metal is the quickest to swing. Giving them a mail shirt + shield prevents super-lucky heart/spine strikes: most deaths were caused when a severed limb or severe organ damage caused a dwarf to fall down, and then be stabbed in the head (finish him!).